David Wilks, a Tory MP from British Columbia, recently made the rookie mistake of telling the truth in front of a guy with a video camera. Wilks was speaking to a small group of constituents unhappy at the government’s massive omnibus budget bill, which shoehorns in significant reforms and laws, knowing that they won’t receive much (if any) scrutiny in the haste to pass the budget.

Post columnist John Ivison is entirely right to say that many of these reforms have no place in a budget bill. And Wilks was only being honest when he said that he doesn’t like everything in the bill, but didn’t see any point voting against it unless 12 other Tory MPs were also willing to break ranks and vote against the bill — the minimum number of dissenters required to stop it. If those 12 were willing to do it, he said, he’d do it, too. Wilks was quickly encouraged to walk back those comments by the Prime Minister’s Office, and walk them back he did, but he should have stuck by them. Not only because he’s right, but because the last few months have already seen several examples of the Conservative government changing course after their own caucus became restive.

The first is well known. In February, during the public outrage over Bill C-30, the so-called Lawful Access Internet surveillance bill, even while the government was firmly dug in defending its bill (see Toews, Vic; and, “With us or with child pornographers”), backbench Tories were not happy. And they weren’t shy about talking to the media, even if their backbench position required that they talk to the media … quietly.

Those in the public who were closely following the debate may recall reading, in the Post and elsewhere, columns and reports hinting at “unease” and “concerns” in the Conservative caucus that the bill’s search provisions went too far. I was one of the columnists writing on the issue, and myself heard from “people in the know” that media columns attacking the government’s position on the bill were being received like manna from heaven by Tory MPs, who then used those columns to hammer away at the senior party operatives’ insistence that the bill go forward as-written.

It’s hard to say with certainty what exactly tipped the scales against the government pushing ahead with the bill — media backlash, public anger, strong opposition from, well, the opposition, or caucus unrest — but for my money, the caucus unrest shouldn’t be underestimated. This government — all governments, really — are rarely much impressed by what the media thinks, and majority governments have little to fear from the opposition. Public anger is riskier, of course, but dissension in the ranks has got to be read by any government as a sign that it has gone too far. The opposition thinking you’re wrong is one thing. Your own MPs — and probably your own voting base with them — is something far different. It’s no surprise that, in recent weeks, the Conservatives have quietly let Bill C-30 die.

The other example of an unhappy caucus revolt is a little less well-known, but has the benefit of at least being more recent. After the scrapping of the long-gun registry, pro-gun advocates across Canada were quick to notice that, using the (overly) broad powers granted them under the Firearms Act, provincial Chief Firearms Officers were ordering gun stores to record the personal information of all those purchasing a non-restricted firearm. The information, kept in ledger books owned by the firearms programs of the individual provinces, were said by many to constitute back-door gun registries. (I don’t agree with that, but certainly understand the frustration of Canada’s lawful firearms owners.)

At first, the government wasn’t interested. Conservative MP Candice Hoeppner, one of the strongest pro-gun voices in the government, released a statement confirming that the government had lived up to its promise to scrap the long-gun registry and dismissed the ledger books as a provincial issue. This isn’t surprising — while killing off the long-gun registry was a promise that had to be lived up to, it’s unlikely that the Tories are interested in doing much more for Canada’s firearms owners, lest their newly found urban support in Toronto, and southern Ontario generally, wilt away in the face of attacks slamming the Conservatives as pro-gun.

That logic went up like a lead balloon with the rank-and-file. Exactly as with the Lawful Access bill, within a day or two I began to hear, from multiple sources, that backbench Tory MPs were furious and were fielding many angry phone calls from constituents. The issue simmered for a while, meetings were held, and I continued to get frequent updates from those involved in the discussion — in and out of government – reporting that brushing off the ledgers as a provincial issue simply wasn’t going to fly with Tory MPs. Less than two weeks after the issue seemed to be dismissed by Hoeppner, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews changed course and ordered the head of the RCMP to instruct his firearms officers to stop collecting the data. That hasn’t gone over well with the provinces, Ontario especially, but it’s still proof that when the backbenches are restless, the government does sometimes listen.

That’s why it’s unfortunate that Wilks wasn’t willing to stand by his entirely truthful, entirely correct comments disagreeing with the federal government’s decision to cram all sorts of unrelated regulations and laws into the budget bill. It’s sneaky, it’s undemocratic, and it’s simply not necessary for a majority government. And there are lots of Tory MPs, who believe in democracy more than simple raw partisan politics, who agree with Wilks. If given someone to rally behind, even behind the scenes, they may have done so. David Wilks could have been that man. Too bad he won’t be.

Almost Done!

Postmedia wants to improve your reading experience as well as share the best deals and promotions from our advertisers with you. The information below will be used to optimize the content and make ads across the network more relevant to you. You can always change the information you share with us by editing your profile.

By clicking "Create Account", I hearby grant permission to Postmedia to use my account information to create my account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia's Terms and Conditions with respect to my use of the Site and I have read and understand Postmedia's Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my information in accordance with the Postmedia's Privacy Policy.

Postmedia wants to improve your reading experience as well as share the best deals and promotions from our advertisers with you. The information below will be used to optimize the content and make ads across the network more relevant to you. You can always change the information you share with us by editing your profile.

By clicking "Create Account", I hearby grant permission to Postmedia to use my account information to create my account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia's Terms and Conditions with respect to my use of the Site and I have read and understand Postmedia's Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my information in accordance with the Postmedia's Privacy Policy.